I really don’t like this. Seems like a very weak way to try and start a bandwagon rolling. You just wanted to add this information so other players were aware, hmm
When I fixed the tags simply as they went a long way to readabilty. that’s it. First time was done without much thought, second time without the missing quote tags the post would’ve been very difficult to follow.
I’m here, just dealing with lingering disruptions to my sleeping cycle, which really suck. Work has me for the next few hours but I WILL have a lengthy post by this evening (Pacific time).
Concerning Idle’s message from the mod, I was a scum roleblocker in Mahaloth’s Weird Wild West game, and whoever I blocked received a message similar to that. Idle may have been protected or he may have been blocked.
I disagree with Pleo regarding self-preservation votes, but I have seen him make the same statement in a previous game. I think it was the International game, so I think it is something that he truly believes and is a null tell. As far as my disagreement with it, I just feel that the major advantage that town has is numbers, and by sacrificing yourself, you reduce that advantage. I know we are trying to get information, but I don’t think the trade is worth it in this case.
I still do not really think that Ushimi is scum, but I realize his lynch toDay would provide quite a bit of information (especially if he turns up scum). I am not going to vote for him, but I won’t try to prevent his lynch, either.
I do think the group that voted for Suburban for his supposed PIS is likely to have at least one scum in it, and I think that Pleo could have been trying to start an easy wagon on Suburban. I want to go back and look at Chipicabra, but likely Pleo or Chipicabra will get my vote.
Also, I realize this is my first post toDay, but the fact that Red Skeezix has not yet posted makes me suspicious, since I am fairly sure that he has used lurking and staying in the background as a scum strategy before.
Do you object because you honestly feel editing is a null tell, or do you object because you’re most guilty of editing?
Your explanation is exactly what I would expect from anybody who edited their post, which makes the explanation a null tell. I personally believe that editing is a slightly suspicious event. I have never used it as a major reason to vote for someone, but it is an additional piece of information. I strongly believe that while both town and scum might edit with the same frequency, scum have the most to gain from it. I’m sorry to say that case-building is when, in my experience, editors have the most to gain.
Please note I didn’t vote for you. This is hardly enough to justify a lynch. But it is something worth pointing out. Consider: would you have objected as much had I not pointed to your edits at all? Would you have objected if you had not edited in this game, and I was pointing out other posters?
Heh @ prod from mental guy. I’m a busy guy, and while i have been reading, i haven’t had a moment to really sit down and formulate my thoughts. That plus having no access to here at work, means that you won’t see a post from me on a weekday between 7a et and 6p et. Also, you’re known to be lurky as scum, so don’t go pointing that finger around unless you point it at yourself first.
Pleonast:
His explanation was not sufficient for his statement of reasoning for putting pressure on self preserving players. He’s skillfully ignoring the fact that if you are town and on the block, then you know the alignment of at least one of the players who might be lynched, namely yourself. So he proposes that players should vote in a manner which prevents them from using their most solid piece of information (their own pm) to their advantage. IMO, an 11th hour self preservation vote is the nullest of the null tells, since both town and scum players have ample reason to do it.
I think this where I take the biggest issue. You’ve attributed self preservation votes to a scum only activity for no reason whatsoever. The only problem is you haven’t given any real evidence that it is a scum only providence to vote in self preservation. AFAICT you are trying to say that because scum will do something, that means only scum will do it.
vote Pleonast
Chronos: You seem willing to lynch ushi on the fact that it could provide information that would implicate people in the oredigger bandwagon. I know we lynch for info, but what info does it provide to you if ushi comes up town?
This statement feels like you’re making assumptions that you’re not explaining. Please elucidate on why there should be scum in the group that voted for Suburban’s possible PIS?
If he comes up Town, then it tells us that the people voting for Oredigger weren’t doing so in order to save a scum-buddy, and thereby removes that line of suspicion. Knowing which arguments are not helpful is just as important as knowing which ones are. Plus, of course, we’re not just lynching for information: The whole reason his death would give useful information is because there’s a plausible reason to think he might be Scum. And of course a kill of a Scum would be good even if it didn’t give information.
And let me say that I certainly think that Pleonast is wrong about defensive voting, but that it looks to me like he’s wrong in his own sincere beliefs, not as a ploy to try to get someone strung up, or whatever it is being attributed to him. He’s certainly known for his idiosyncratic views of how best to play, and I believe someone has said that he made the same argument in International.
Having major internet issues at home, folks.
**Vote Count:
Ushimi(2): Chronos, Wolverine
Pleonast(5): Thesearemypants, Idle, Oneandonly, Meeko, Redskeezix
Chipacabra(1): Suburban
Wolverine(1): Astral**
Finally got a chance to read everything to date. Not enough time to reply in detail to everyone, some I’m going to generalize.
I was expecting a few votes for taking a stand against self-preservation voting, but I’m rather surprised at how quickly a full bandwagon formed. Is it really that hard to understand why voting simply to save yourself is exactly the sort of selfish play that scum do? Try thinking about what’s good for your team for once instead of your own short-sighted self-interest. :smack:
As always, I’m willing to be lynched to prove my point. I think the votes against me will be quite instructive. My primary suspicion is on the players that voted for both me and ushi: Oneandonly and Idle. They’re both guilty of jumping on the “easy” target. Idle in particular is voting suspiciously.
vote Idle Thoughts for
Are you including me in the list of people that voted for Suburban?
Vote Ushi
Nothing’s happened to make me any less suspicious, really, and no one’s come out as more suspicious.
As for Pleo… Pleo’s stance on self-preservation is just wrong. But being wrong isn’t the same as being scum.
Here’s my case against Chronos:
Such jump-on-it-quick votes in general ring suspicious to me: unless one is confident in their vote, what’s the rush? Is there a prize for being the first to vote?
Seems to me town should be hesitant to vote on weak information and want to solicit as much discussion as possible in hopes of drawing out Scum, especially with 2 Town down.
Seems to me that if you are voting on supposition, and - depending on how kind you want to phrase it - your entire point was either incompetent or ill-formed, you might want to at least re-consider your vote. Yet, he’s kept on trucking as if he was correct in his initial assumptions.
This to me indicates that Chronos has already made up his mind how to vote. I’m quite suspicious of such indicators, because they mean there is something about why the person is voting beyond the proffered explanation.
This is very strange, because it implies that if I come up Scum, then it tells us that the people voting for Oredigger were doing so in order to save a scum-buddy. If you are Town and you voted Oredigger, you realize this argument is faulty. If you are Scum, well then… fuck you, scum.
It also implies that “removing a line of suspicion” is some great help. There are umpteen lines of suspicion, and if you lynch me and I come up Town, that’s going to open up another umpteen lines of suspicion.
Further, it is patently untrue that “knowing which arguments are not helpful is just as important as knowing which ones are”, because there are a near-infinite amount of unhelpful lines of arguments compared to a very limited amount of helpful lines of argument. The latter are far more valuable.
Also note this explanation in contrast with his first explanation:
If I’m Town then, which is it? “Probably doesn’t say anything” or “removes a line of suspicion”? The truth is they are equivalent, because “removing a line of suspicion” doesn’t say anything. So why present it as justification?
Again, such faulty and fallacious reasoning.
Or, perhaps you think that somehow the entire Scum team is stupid enough to jump out into the light to save me, the most masterful and subtle player ever? Recall that I was way ahead in votes, and - contrary to Chronos’ misunderstanding - no one ever switched away from me. To get that math to work would require a huge move by Scum, and I was only “saved” by one vote. That would be an enourmous risk to not only attempt an uncertain save, but one that would leave the save-ee or savior(s) vulnerable to a lynch on the very next day, and reveal a lot of Scum.
I don’t think that holds up.
Excuse me? There’s no more - or less - plausible reason to think I am Scum than any other player. Why present this so? The only way my death gives some useful information is if I come up Scum (which I won’t), and as I’ve shown above that means Scum was too stupid to have stayed in the game for long anyway.
Not going to happen. Why do you keep presenting the most unlikely scenario as likely?
In summary, he’s wrong. Now, I know he’s wrong, but I understand other Town can’t be sure. However, I also think his reasoning and arguments don’t hold up either, but everyone else who doesn’t know will have to judge that ahead of time.
====
I hope this answers your questions. Which do you think more reasonable: I am Scum and the scum team coordinated some sort of last-minute (and easily post-analyized) rescue or I am Town and Oredigger just got mislynched (a rare event on Day One, to be sure)?
Your analysis and Chronos’ analysis are both not weighing the alternatives correctly. You are gambling on everything coming up Scum, which is exceedingly unlikely.
====
The only point I don’t agree on Pleonast with is that a self-preservation vote is anti-town or a scum-only move. I still assert it makes perfect sense, especially in the specific situation Oredigger found himself in.
However, since that is the only point of disagreement I don’t think it’s cause to vote him.
I also would like people to address the accusation that Pleonast is my “scumbuddy” in the light that I mention earlier: that he specifically says he will switch his vote to me if I change my vote. I find it odd that it seems that the people most “suspicious” of me and/or Pleonast haven’t even bothered to mention this.
For this to hold up you have to think I’m lying by saying I’ll be asleep and trying to plan out a proxy vote (the day ends around 4am my time), Scum is coming riding to the rescue, Pleonast is lying about changing his vote, and all doing so in the most blatantly discoverable way first vote of the game.
====
Chipacabra, so you think I am suspicious because I have a rule-of-thumb that you don’t agree with, but another player who has a rule-of-thumb that is “just wrong” is not suspicious (and even gets a sideways defense)?
MMMhmmm.
====
Still not voting yet…
Ok, I’m going to try and clear up a few things with ushi for the sake of clear communication even though I don’t think I’ll be voting for him again at this point.
Actually, my posts in between your unprompted vanilla claim and the infamous bitchslap were intended as criticisms, though mild and arguably indirect. I was speaking about unprompted vanilla claims in general, and newbies making them in particular. I was also lamenting that the concept of shrinking the unknown pool had not yet been discussed before you decided to make your claim.
I actually think there is more of a consensus than you think on this point. I think most people would rather avoid unprompted vanilla claims without a compelling reason to do so. As for whether or not your claiming to make the point that there are cool names with vanilla roles was compelling enough, that’s debatable. Imho, I think it would have been entirely possible for you to make the point that without needing to admit that you are one yourself, which would have been more useful wifom for the scum as they’d try to sort out whether or not you are making such a statement because you hold such a role vsbecause it is a reasonable point of conjecture, and with no negative effect of further shrinking the unknown pool for the Town on Day 1 after Idle had already made his unprompted vanilla claim.
Moving on to the exchange with the dearly departed Town peeker and the unvote that got you my vote in http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13370129&postcount=387
Peeker sometimes posts in I suppose what you’d call transient running hypotheticals, which is what the “your scumbuddies” portions of his post were. He was making the assumption that you were scum and then projecting that onto what might be going through the minds of your hypothetical teammates. Those assumptions may not apply to an entire post, but just parts of it. I think quite a few players do this, but usually the assumptive/hypothetical portions are more called out and compartmentalized, whereas peeker will just slide into them sometimes in mid-sentence.
This leads me to ushi’s vote against me and continued suspicion of me today
An aside question to Astral on re-read:
In what way did Chronos’ proposal that this was going to be a power-role heavy game just because we’re all “heroes” help town?
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13375714&postcount=496
Despite your attempt to explain yourself, your unvote continues to boil down for me as giving a sub at least an initial free pass. You unvoted the player for no other stated reason other than because they had subbed into the game and the player+role combination you had previously been suspicious of now had a new player portion.
That’s not a misrepresentation. There was nothing to misunderstand. It was a blatant metagame justification that has no basis whatsoever in the game-related information on the table and was a significant inconsistency.
As for most of the apparently excruciating talk about metagaming, ironically, was trying to let you cool your heels before getting you pissed off again. You say that I don’t know you at all, but that is not exactly true. What I do know of you shows you to jump to some early game conjecture conclusions and then present them with a very high degree of confidence, and you seem to have a tendency of flying off the handle in very vitriolic ways that in my view absolutely dwarf the statements that apparently caused the outbursts, one resulting in a substitution and one involving a now-dead Townie, and it was exactly that volatility and not wanting to stoke it that lead to a good bit of the touchy-feely metagame conversation from me. And while I may have engaged in discussion of metagaming, I have not used it in justification or defense of my votes.
At this point it is because Peeker turned up dead that I’m not voting for you right now. I suspect that the scum may have selected him in order to try and get you lynched toDay.
Case in point,
Vote Chip
His delay in voting for ushi after being the first to react to the unvote smacks of waiting to see if others would take up the case, and he’s still gunning for ushi now.
This is why I love this game. Ushi is now voting for the person for whom my vote yesterday resulted in ushi voting for me, and I’m voting for the person who made me realize what I wanted to vote for Ushi yesterday. Such is mafia life.
**Vote Count:
Ushimi(3): Chronos, Wolverine, Chipacabra
Pleonast(5): Thesearemypants, Idle, Oneandonly, Meeko, Redskeezix
Chipacabra(2): Suburban, Cometothedarkside
Wolverine(1): Astral
Idle(1): Pleonast
**
NETA:
That part was supposed to be tacked onto the very end, not stuck weirdly in the middle.
Is it not possible that self-interest and “what’s good for the team” might coincide?
I think you’re being stubborn and narrow-minded. But those are qualities found equally as often in Town as in Scum, so I don’t think it tells us anything.
I’m not voting for **anyone **at this point. Not sure how that could be more clear, considering the last line of my last post is “Still not voting yet…”
With due respect, your inability to identify facts doesn’t make me hunger for “clear communication” lessons with you as the instructor.
What it does is make me less suspicious of your mis-characterization of my position, because it shows you aren’t overly concerned with getting the facts right.
Contrast this to my raised suspicions of other players whose posts I agreed with in the past and now do not - in those cases I wonder what has changed.
I don’t think there’s any value in hashing out the rest of the disagreement I have with your post, because I don’t think it impacts the actual game in any way.
Feel free to replace ‘voting for’ with ‘building a case against’, in that case. I hadn’t read to the bottom of your post yet to see that you are indeed building cases against people that you’re not voting for, apparently.